THE INCARNATION OF CHRIST
THE INCARNATION OF CHRIST
All praise to thee, Eternal Lord, Clothed in a garb of flesh and blood; Choosing a manger for a throne, While worlds of worlds are thine alone. Martin Luther
The Incarnation in Christianity is the belief that the second person of the Trinity, also known as God the Son or the Logos (Word), "became flesh" by being conceived in the womb of Mary, also known as the Theotokos (God-bearer). Consequently, the divine nature of the Son was united, but not mixed, with human nature in one divine Person, Jesus Christ, who is both "truly God and truly man".
It is the longing of the mortal man to see the immortal God. It is the natural heart pangs of the visible man to see the invisible God. This desire is one of the heart yearnings of man that resulted in corrupted man condescending to less than animalistic nature of which the living man bows than to dead though visible idols. Job expressed this in Job 23: 8, 9: “Behold, I go forward, but He is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive Him: On the left hand, where He doth work, but I cannot behold Him: He hideth Himself on the right hand, that I cannot see Him.” It is in answer to this inner man’s cravings that the second person in the Trinity “became flesh” so as to be made visible to mortal man. In fact, when Phillip asked Jesus to “show us the Father, and it suffices us,” Jesus replied, “…he that hath seen me hath seen the Father…” John 14: 8, 9. “No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten of God, He hath declared Him John 1:18.
The fact that God can become man is a mystery that should be taken by faith and balanced by reason. His unique preexistence demands a unique birth. Furthermore, since the essential characteristic of deity is supernatural, it is expected that His birth will not be like normal mortal.The doctrine is cardinal because a denial of it makes the doubter an antichrist: “Hereby we know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesses nor that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist.” I John 4:2, 3.
The Incarnation implies three facts: (1) The Divine Person of Jesus Christ; (2) The Human Nature of Jesus Christ; (3) The Hypostatic Union of the Human with the Divine Nature in the Divine Person of Jesus Christ.
Hypostatic union is neither moral union nor union in a figurative sense of the word; “but a union that is physical, a union of two substances or natures so as to make One Person, a union which means that God is Man and Man is God in the Person of Jesus Christ.”
Closely connected with the doctrine of Incarnation is the doctrine of the Virgin Birth.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH OF JESUS CHRIST
The virgin birth of Jesus is the Bible teaching that Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother Mary by the Holy Spirit and born while Mary was yet a virgin. The New Testament references are Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-38. Since Jesus is the incarnate Son of God, only God could be His real, not adopted, Father.
What the virgin birth is not
(i) It does not mean that Jesus born in a manner different from other children. The birth is natural while the conception is supernatural. Mary still carried the pregnancy for nine months like other women who gave birth.
(ii) It was not a mere miraculous conception like that of Elizabeth and Sarah who were past age. In those cases, the agency of man was involved in the conception while in the case of virgin birth, only Mary was involved.
(iii) It is not immaculate conception, as taught by the Roman Catholic, which asserts that Mary was conceived and born without original sin. This dogma has no single support from the Bible except that it contradicts the clear teaching of the Bible that “ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God” Romans 3:23. The angel Gabriel called Mary “blessed art thou among women” not above women (Luke 1:28) and Jesus called all believing women His mothers as He called Mary (Matthew 12:48, 49).
(iv) It is also distinct from the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary, the belief that Mary remained a virgin for her entire life. Mark 6:3, Matthew 12:46, 47, John 7:3-5. Mary gave birth to at least 6 children apart from Jesus Christ.
(v) It is not the virgin birth of religious mythologies of eastern religions. Those ones have no historical foundations. The virgin birth of Jesus has both the backing of the scriptures and can be checked up in extra history books.
(vi) It is not modern day “virgin pregnancy.” It is said to be a case where women affirmed their status as virgins and did not use assisted reproductive technology, yet reported virgin births." This modern day virgin births theory so far is based on questionnaires filled by respondents which have not been verified to be true.
What the Bible Teaches on Virgin Birth
(i) The Virgin Birth was foreshadowed in the Old Testament. Genesis 3:15 anticipated it. “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” The Bible always uses the word the “seed of man”. This is the only place where “her seed” i.e. the seed of the woman is used and it is referring to the Lord Jesus.
(ii) Prophet Isaiah prophesied it. “Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”. Matthew in chapter 1 verse 23 recorded that the birth of Christ is its fulfillment and added that Immanuel means “God with us.”
Objection to the Virgin Birth Based On the Word Translated Virgin
It was alleged by critics of the supernatural that the word almah translated “virgin” in Isaiah should not have been translated virgin, but rather a “young woman” of marriageable age. That informed the reason why Revised Standard Version used a young woman in Isaiah 7;14 instead of virgin. They contended that only the word bethulah in Hebrew could be translated virgin.This argument is weak on the following grounds. (a) Isaiah called it a sign to the house of Israel. If the word is not virgin, there is nothing supernatural in the prophecy any more. (b) Of all the places where almah is used in the Old Testament, none of them means a young woman who
has known a man. (c) Matthew recorded that the fulfillment is in a virgin called Mary.
In fact, Martin Luther, the great reformer threw out a challenge that: ”If a Jew or a Christian can prove to me that in any other passage of Scripture almah means a married woman, I will give him a hundred florins, although God alone knows where I will find them.”
(iii) Paul, the Apostle, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, attest to the fact that Joseph was not involved in the birth of Jesus. Galatian 4:4 asserts that Jesus was “made of a woman.”
Objection to the Virgin Birth Based on the Genealogy of Jesus Christ
It is opined by critics of the Virgin Birth that the two genealogies of Jesus Christ as recorded in Matthew 1: 1-16 and Luke 3:23-38 are that of Joseph and therefore it cannot be claimed that Jesus was of Mary
A careful study of the genealogy proves this allegation false. As it is true of every man and woman, the genealogies of a man are two, both paternal and maternal. There are two genealogies of Jesus Christ, both paternal and maternal. The genealogy of Jesus in the book of Matthew is that of Joseph. It begins with Abraham, the founder of the Hebrew nation and concludes with Joseph, the husband of Mary. According to Scoffield, Jeconiah mentioned in Matthew 1:11 is called Coniah in Jeremiah 22: 24-30 where a curse is pronounced on him that none of his children would prosper as a king of Judah. Had our Lord been a descendant of Jechonias been the natural son of Joseph, He could never had rained in power and righteousness because of the curse. But Christ came through Mary’s line not through Joseph. In fact, verse 16 of the account says “Jacob beget Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.” The word whom underlined is feminine indicating the Scripture’s carefulness in pointing out that Jesus is in reality the son of Mary. The genealogy in Matthew is therefore that of Joseph to show the Jews that Jesus being a foster or adopted child of Joseph has the legal right to the throne of David.
The genealogy in the book of Luke is that of Mary through Nathan, the son of David. Observe that Luke 3:23 recorded that Jesus (as was supposed) was the son of Joseph, the son of Heli. As was supposed is an indication that it was the common expectation even though not the reality. Joseph was actually the son-in- law of Heli although it was acceptable to call him the son of Heli. In sum, while Mary’s maternal side is Levi (see Luke 1:36 cpw Luke 1:5), her paternal side is Judah and her genealogy is the one in Luke.
The Nature of the Incarnation
It is clear from the teachings of the Scripture that Jesus Christ is perfect God and perfectly human. The crucial question is the manner of this tremendous miracle, the way of uniting the Divine with the human nature in one and the same Person.
Different school of thoughts has attempted to answer this question.
Nestorianism teaches that the union of the two natures is not physical but moral. This theory denies the hypostatic union of the two natures of Christ. The fact is that Incarnation endows Jesus Christ with the nature of man without cancelling the nature of God in Him
Monophysitism is the theory that opined that Jesus has only one nature. It is either both the divine and the human intermingled into one or the human was converted into the divine. However, this contradicts the scriptural pronouncement of the Fourth General Council of the Church defined that Jesus Christ remained, after the Incarnation, "perfect in Divinity and perfect in humanity . . . consubstantial with the Father according to His Divinity, consubstantial with us according to His humanity . . . one and the same Christ, the Son, the Lord, the Only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures not intermingled, not changed, not divisible, not separable" This fact is clear from the fact that Jesus Christ manifested the characteristics of human and Divine even when at times they seem contradictory. For example, the Divine is immortal, yet Jesus died.
Monothelitism accepts that Jesus has two natures, separate and distinct but went into heresy that teaches that Jesus has only one will and one activity. Their error was condemned by the Sixth General Council of the Church (the Third Council of Constantinople, 680). It defined that in Christ there were two natural wills and two natural activities, the Divine and the human, and that the human will was not at all contrary to the Divine, but rather perfectly subject thereto.
The error of Monothelism is clear from the Scripture as well as from tradition. Christ did acts of adoration (John 4:22), humility (Matthew 11:29), reverence (Hebrews 5:7). These acts are those of a human will.
The Monothelites denied that there was a human will in Christ. Jesus prayed: "Father, if Thou wilt, remove this cup from me: but yet not my will, but Thine be done," (Luke 22:42). Here there is question of two wills, the Father's and Christ's. The will of Christ was subject to the will of the Father. "As the Father hath given me commandment, so do I" (John 14:31). He became obedient even unto death (Philippians 2:8). This is human will that is subject to God. His Divine will could not have been subject to the will of the Father since they are inseparable.
In conclusion, it should be noted that the Incarnation is a mystery and there will always be room for heresy in anything that is a mystery unless there is full adherence to what the The Incarnation of Christ makes the humanity of Christ a perfect reality. This qualifies Jesus Christ to be the true Mediator between God and man and to be able to take the position of sinful man, pay the penalty for his sins by untold sufferings and eventual physical death, resurrect for his justification and become a perfect example for man to follow.
The Incarnation in Christianity is the belief that the second person of the Trinity, also known as God the Son or the Logos (Word), "became flesh" by being conceived in the womb of Mary, also known as the Theotokos (God-bearer). Consequently, the divine nature of the Son was united, but not mixed, with human nature in one divine Person, Jesus Christ, who is both "truly God and truly man".
It is the longing of the mortal man to see the immortal God. It is the natural heart pangs of the visible man to see the invisible God. This desire is one of the heart yearnings of man that resulted in corrupted man condescending to less than animalistic nature of which the living man bows than to dead though visible idols. Job expressed this in Job 23: 8, 9: “Behold, I go forward, but He is not there; and backward, but I cannot perceive Him: On the left hand, where He doth work, but I cannot behold Him: He hideth Himself on the right hand, that I cannot see Him.” It is in answer to this inner man’s cravings that the second person in the Trinity “became flesh” so as to be made visible to mortal man. In fact, when Phillip asked Jesus to “show us the Father, and it suffices us,” Jesus replied, “…he that hath seen me hath seen the Father…” John 14: 8, 9. “No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten of God, He hath declared Him John 1:18.
The fact that God can become man is a mystery that should be taken by faith and balanced by reason. His unique preexistence demands a unique birth. Furthermore, since the essential characteristic of deity is supernatural, it is expected that His birth will not be like normal mortal.The doctrine is cardinal because a denial of it makes the doubter an antichrist: “Hereby we know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesses nor that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist.” I John 4:2, 3.
The Incarnation implies three facts: (1) The Divine Person of Jesus Christ; (2) The Human Nature of Jesus Christ; (3) The Hypostatic Union of the Human with the Divine Nature in the Divine Person of Jesus Christ.
Hypostatic union is neither moral union nor union in a figurative sense of the word; “but a union that is physical, a union of two substances or natures so as to make One Person, a union which means that God is Man and Man is God in the Person of Jesus Christ.”
Closely connected with the doctrine of Incarnation is the doctrine of the Virgin Birth.
THE VIRGIN BIRTH OF JESUS CHRIST
The virgin birth of Jesus is the Bible teaching that Jesus was conceived in the womb of his mother Mary by the Holy Spirit and born while Mary was yet a virgin. The New Testament references are Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-38. Since Jesus is the incarnate Son of God, only God could be His real, not adopted, Father.
What the virgin birth is not
(i) It does not mean that Jesus born in a manner different from other children. The birth is natural while the conception is supernatural. Mary still carried the pregnancy for nine months like other women who gave birth.
(ii) It was not a mere miraculous conception like that of Elizabeth and Sarah who were past age. In those cases, the agency of man was involved in the conception while in the case of virgin birth, only Mary was involved.
(iii) It is not immaculate conception, as taught by the Roman Catholic, which asserts that Mary was conceived and born without original sin. This dogma has no single support from the Bible except that it contradicts the clear teaching of the Bible that “ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God” Romans 3:23. The angel Gabriel called Mary “blessed art thou among women” not above women (Luke 1:28) and Jesus called all believing women His mothers as He called Mary (Matthew 12:48, 49).
(iv) It is also distinct from the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary, the belief that Mary remained a virgin for her entire life. Mark 6:3, Matthew 12:46, 47, John 7:3-5. Mary gave birth to at least 6 children apart from Jesus Christ.
(v) It is not the virgin birth of religious mythologies of eastern religions. Those ones have no historical foundations. The virgin birth of Jesus has both the backing of the scriptures and can be checked up in extra history books.
(vi) It is not modern day “virgin pregnancy.” It is said to be a case where women affirmed their status as virgins and did not use assisted reproductive technology, yet reported virgin births." This modern day virgin births theory so far is based on questionnaires filled by respondents which have not been verified to be true.
What the Bible Teaches on Virgin Birth
(i) The Virgin Birth was foreshadowed in the Old Testament. Genesis 3:15 anticipated it. “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” The Bible always uses the word the “seed of man”. This is the only place where “her seed” i.e. the seed of the woman is used and it is referring to the Lord Jesus.
(ii) Prophet Isaiah prophesied it. “Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”. Matthew in chapter 1 verse 23 recorded that the birth of Christ is its fulfillment and added that Immanuel means “God with us.”
Objection to the Virgin Birth Based On the Word Translated Virgin
It was alleged by critics of the supernatural that the word almah translated “virgin” in Isaiah should not have been translated virgin, but rather a “young woman” of marriageable age. That informed the reason why Revised Standard Version used a young woman in Isaiah 7;14 instead of virgin. They contended that only the word bethulah in Hebrew could be translated virgin.This argument is weak on the following grounds. (a) Isaiah called it a sign to the house of Israel. If the word is not virgin, there is nothing supernatural in the prophecy any more. (b) Of all the places where almah is used in the Old Testament, none of them means a young woman who
has known a man. (c) Matthew recorded that the fulfillment is in a virgin called Mary.
In fact, Martin Luther, the great reformer threw out a challenge that: ”If a Jew or a Christian can prove to me that in any other passage of Scripture almah means a married woman, I will give him a hundred florins, although God alone knows where I will find them.”
(iii) Paul, the Apostle, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, attest to the fact that Joseph was not involved in the birth of Jesus. Galatian 4:4 asserts that Jesus was “made of a woman.”
Objection to the Virgin Birth Based on the Genealogy of Jesus Christ
It is opined by critics of the Virgin Birth that the two genealogies of Jesus Christ as recorded in Matthew 1: 1-16 and Luke 3:23-38 are that of Joseph and therefore it cannot be claimed that Jesus was of Mary
A careful study of the genealogy proves this allegation false. As it is true of every man and woman, the genealogies of a man are two, both paternal and maternal. There are two genealogies of Jesus Christ, both paternal and maternal. The genealogy of Jesus in the book of Matthew is that of Joseph. It begins with Abraham, the founder of the Hebrew nation and concludes with Joseph, the husband of Mary. According to Scoffield, Jeconiah mentioned in Matthew 1:11 is called Coniah in Jeremiah 22: 24-30 where a curse is pronounced on him that none of his children would prosper as a king of Judah. Had our Lord been a descendant of Jechonias been the natural son of Joseph, He could never had rained in power and righteousness because of the curse. But Christ came through Mary’s line not through Joseph. In fact, verse 16 of the account says “Jacob beget Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.” The word whom underlined is feminine indicating the Scripture’s carefulness in pointing out that Jesus is in reality the son of Mary. The genealogy in Matthew is therefore that of Joseph to show the Jews that Jesus being a foster or adopted child of Joseph has the legal right to the throne of David.
The genealogy in the book of Luke is that of Mary through Nathan, the son of David. Observe that Luke 3:23 recorded that Jesus (as was supposed) was the son of Joseph, the son of Heli. As was supposed is an indication that it was the common expectation even though not the reality. Joseph was actually the son-in- law of Heli although it was acceptable to call him the son of Heli. In sum, while Mary’s maternal side is Levi (see Luke 1:36 cpw Luke 1:5), her paternal side is Judah and her genealogy is the one in Luke.
The Nature of the Incarnation
It is clear from the teachings of the Scripture that Jesus Christ is perfect God and perfectly human. The crucial question is the manner of this tremendous miracle, the way of uniting the Divine with the human nature in one and the same Person.
Different school of thoughts has attempted to answer this question.
Nestorianism teaches that the union of the two natures is not physical but moral. This theory denies the hypostatic union of the two natures of Christ. The fact is that Incarnation endows Jesus Christ with the nature of man without cancelling the nature of God in Him
Monophysitism is the theory that opined that Jesus has only one nature. It is either both the divine and the human intermingled into one or the human was converted into the divine. However, this contradicts the scriptural pronouncement of the Fourth General Council of the Church defined that Jesus Christ remained, after the Incarnation, "perfect in Divinity and perfect in humanity . . . consubstantial with the Father according to His Divinity, consubstantial with us according to His humanity . . . one and the same Christ, the Son, the Lord, the Only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures not intermingled, not changed, not divisible, not separable" This fact is clear from the fact that Jesus Christ manifested the characteristics of human and Divine even when at times they seem contradictory. For example, the Divine is immortal, yet Jesus died.
Monothelitism accepts that Jesus has two natures, separate and distinct but went into heresy that teaches that Jesus has only one will and one activity. Their error was condemned by the Sixth General Council of the Church (the Third Council of Constantinople, 680). It defined that in Christ there were two natural wills and two natural activities, the Divine and the human, and that the human will was not at all contrary to the Divine, but rather perfectly subject thereto.
The error of Monothelism is clear from the Scripture as well as from tradition. Christ did acts of adoration (John 4:22), humility (Matthew 11:29), reverence (Hebrews 5:7). These acts are those of a human will.
The Monothelites denied that there was a human will in Christ. Jesus prayed: "Father, if Thou wilt, remove this cup from me: but yet not my will, but Thine be done," (Luke 22:42). Here there is question of two wills, the Father's and Christ's. The will of Christ was subject to the will of the Father. "As the Father hath given me commandment, so do I" (John 14:31). He became obedient even unto death (Philippians 2:8). This is human will that is subject to God. His Divine will could not have been subject to the will of the Father since they are inseparable.
In conclusion, it should be noted that the Incarnation is a mystery and there will always be room for heresy in anything that is a mystery unless there is full adherence to what the The Incarnation of Christ makes the humanity of Christ a perfect reality. This qualifies Jesus Christ to be the true Mediator between God and man and to be able to take the position of sinful man, pay the penalty for his sins by untold sufferings and eventual physical death, resurrect for his justification and become a perfect example for man to follow.
Comments
Post a Comment